On 3/19/2020 3:54 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 19-03-20, 15:41, Sibi Sankar wrote:
Viresh,
Saravana's example does show a device
with multiple opp tables but doesn't
need multiple opp table support to
land though (since it works fine with
the current implementation). I am more
interested in understanding your/
Stephen's/Saravana's stance on adding
multiple opp-table support. Personally
I feel its inevitable, since multiple
qc drivers using interconnect opp-tables,
routinely need vote on multiple paths in
a non-trivial manner.
The OPP core doesn't support multiple OPP tables for a device and I
don't understand how it will. And so I have been waiting for a reply.
I thought this series indeed is proposing to add that support in OPP core?
a.k.a "[RFC v3 06/10] opp: Allow multiple opp_tables to be mapped to a single device"
Could you please post a link to the discussion that you are referring to
here?
I looked at a few links posted in the cover letter as dependencies and
it seems
like the discussions are pending for *months* and not weeks but I
might have looked
at the wrong ones.
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200114103448.odnvqawnqb3twst5@vireshk-i7/
Rajendra,
Viresh is referring to ^^ one
Right, thanks.
These discussions are stalled for over 2 months now waiting on a response from Saravana.
Viresh, whats the way forward here and how long do we plan on waiting for Saravanas response?
--
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member
of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
